iBaBBBBBBBBBBBeBBBBBBBBiaBEgRBiBB  b  s 


v. of  III,  Library 


«BBBIBBtBIBIBIBIB 


EgBSgsaRIKltgMgllglBBKWgTOgHgHg^BagKBglKltgllgllHlIgggBgingllghxi^llglglKIBg^BxllaicaxlIxlglia; 


OUTDOOR  RELIEF 
OF  THE  POOR 


m 


'Westchester  County 


,  i 


A  STUDY 

Based  Primarily  -on  the  Records  of  1916 

together  with  some  references  to  subsequent  conditions 
by  the 

WESTCHESTER  COUNTY  RESEARCH  BUREAU 

15  COURT  STREET,  WHITE  PLAINS,  N,  Y. 


HkIIkIIMxII 


fgilRII»!«llgl!«llKll«l[Kirgr«l[«ll«lS1!H1l5:lfgll51fKl[51l«l[511gl[ST« 


BBiBiBBiBBiBBiBeBiBBiBBaBBBBiBBBiBBBBBBBBB  a  bss  sab  bb  a  B.aBaaBaal 


OUTDOOR  RELIEF 
OF  THE  POOR 


m 


W  estckester  Comity 


A  STUDY 

Based  Primarily  on  the  Records  of  1916 

together  with  some  references  to  subsequent  conditions 
hy  the 

WESTCHESTER  COUNTY  R.ESEARCH  BUREAU 

15  COURT  STREET,  WHITE  PLAINS,  N,  Y, 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2017  with  funding  from 

University  of  Illinois  Urbana-Champaign  Alternates 


https://archive.org/details/outdoorreliefofpOOwest 


OUTDOOR  RELIEF  OF  THE  POOR 

IN  WESTCHESTER  COUNTY 

Classification  of  Poor  Relief 

To  avoid  the  confusion  ordinarily  experienced  by  the  layman  setting  out 
to  obtain  charitable  aid  for  persons  not  capable  of  self-support,  it  should  be 
explained  that  poor  relief  is  classified  in  two  ways:  — 

I.  PUBLIC  AND  PRIVATE 

1.  Public  Relief 

Public  relief  is  that  given  at  the  expense  of  the  taxpayer  out  of 
funds  levied  upon,  and  collected  from  the  public  by  properly 
constituted  governmental  authorities,  and  is  administered  by 
state  agencies,  county  agencies,  or  town  or  city  agencies,  as 
will  be  explained  later. 

2.  Private  Relief 

Private  relief  is  relief  given  by  individuals  or  by  independent 
civic  organizations  (such  as  charity  organizations,  or  the 
children’s  aid  societies,  or  privately  owned  and  conducted 
hospitals,  etc.). 

Institutions  and  societies  of  the  latter  class  are  supported  by 
private  contributions  from  individual  citizens  and  not  from 
tax  moneys. 

Public  relief  is  sometimes  given  in  private  institutions  as  follows: 

When  the  public  institutions  for  the  accommodation  of  the  poor  are  not 
large  enough  or  not  suitably  equipped  to  accommodate  all  cases  which  de¬ 
mand  relief  at  public  expense,  the  proper  officers  in  charge  of  such  cases  com¬ 
mit  them  to  private  institutions  (under  arrangement  and  agreement  with 
such  institutions)  and  the  public  pays  the  private  institutions  the  charges 
for  maintenance  of  such  cases. 

II.  INSTITUTIONAL  AND  OUTDOOR  RELIEF 

Poor  relief,  public  or  private,  may  be  either  institutional  or  outdoor 
relief. 

1.  Institutional  Relief 

Institutional  relief  is  provided  within  the  shelter  of  an  institu¬ 
tion  such  as  an  almshouse  (public  relief)  or  a  privately  sup¬ 
ported  institution  (private  relief). 

2.  Outdoor  Relief 

“Outdoor  Relief”  is  a  term  used  to  describe  relief  administered 
to  poor  persons  who  are  not  sent  to  an  institution.  It  does 
not  mean  out-of-doors,  but  simply  outside  of  the  doors  of  in¬ 
stitutions.  The  recipients  of  such  relief  in  most  cases  re¬ 
main  in  their  own  homes. 


3 


Public  relief  is  regulated  by  law  as  to  the  amount  which  may  be  furnished, 
the  persons  to  whom  it  may  be  given,  the  places  where  it  may  be  given,  i.  e., 
whether  outdoor  relief  or  institutional,  and  what  officials  shall  administer  the 
several  kinds  of  relief  provided  for. 

Private  relief  is  limited  only  by  the  amount  of  funds  provided  for  such 
relief  and  the  judgment  of  the  persons  duly  appointed  to  distribute  such  relief. 

Scope  of  this  Study 

This  study  will  deal  with  the  type  of  public  relief  administered  in  the 
townships  of  Westchester  County,  under  the  laws  of  the  State  of  New  York, 
and  the  regulations  of  the  local  legislative  bodies  of  the  county  and  of  towns. 
In  other  words,  it  will  deal  only  with  public  outdoor  relief  and  the  commit¬ 
ment  of  paupers  to  institutions  by  overseers  of  the  poor. 

The  main  purposes  of  the  study  were  as  follows: 

1.  To  determine  how  far  the  statutory  procedure  is  carried  out  by  the 
overseers;  i.  e.,  the  knowledge  of,  and  compliance  with,  the  poor  laws 
by  the  officers  responsible  for  their  administration. 

2.  To  determine  the  general  qualifications  of  the  overseers  of  the  poor. 

3.  To  ascertain  the  general  quality  of  outdoor  relief. 

The  period  primarily  covered  by  the  investigation  was  the  fiscal  year  1916 
although  some  attention  has  been  given  to  preceding  and  later  periods. 

The  four  cities  of  Westchester  County  were  not  included  in  this  study. 

Sources  of  Information 

The  sources  from  which  the  information  in  the  following  report  has  been 
obtained  are  as  follows: 

1.  Reports  of  the  overseers  to  the  County  Superintendent  of  the  Poor. 

2.  The  original  records  on  file  in  the  offices  of  the  several  town  super¬ 
visors  and  town  clerks. 

3.  The  original  records  of  the  overseers  of  the  poor. 

4.  Reports  by  the  Bureau  of  Muncipal  Accounts  of  the  State  Comptrol¬ 
ler’s  Department,  of  examinations  made  by  that  bureau’s  examiners 
in  the  several  towns  in  Westchester  County. 

(The  representative  of  the  Bureau  visited  the  comptroller’s  office  at 
Albany  and  examined  all  the  Westchester  County  records). 

5.  Personal  interviews  with  families  relieved;  with  grocers  who  filled 
the  orders  of  the  overseers  of  the  poor;  and  with  citizens  of  the  vari¬ 
ous  towns. 

6.  The  records  of  the  County  Treasurer. 

7.  The  records  of  the  County  Superintendent  of  the  Poor,  and  subse¬ 
quently  those  of  the  Commissioner  of  Charities  and  Corrections. 

8.  The  records  and  reports  of  the  State  Charities  Aid  Association. 

9.  The  statutes  of  the  State  of  New  York. 

10.  The  resolutions  of  the  Board  of  Supervisors  and  the  resolutions  of  the 
town  boards. 


4 


\ 


Control  of  Poor  Relief 

Poor  Relief  in  Westchester  County  was  governed  until  January  1st,  1917 
by  the  general  Poor  Law  of  the  State,  and  since  that  date  in  part  by  a  par¬ 
ticular  act  applying  only  to  Westchester  County. 

In  most  cases  the  officers  charged  with  the  administration  of  poor  relief 
are  a  County  Superintendent  of  the  Poor,  a  Commissioner  of  Charities  and 
Corrections  for  each  city,  and  one  or  more  Overseers  of  the  Poor  for  each 
town.  Westchester  County  had  a  Superintendent  of  the  Poor  during  1916 
and  until  January  1st,  1917,  when,  under  a  special  act,  applying  only  to 
Westchester  County,  the  office  of  Commissioner  of  Charities  and  Corrections 
was  created.  Under  this  act,  the  County  Commissioner  is  charged  with  the 
duties  of  Superintendent  of  the  Poor,  and  with  additional  duties  of  far- 
reaching  importance.  The  incumbent  of  this  new  office  in  Westchester  Coun¬ 
ty  has  been  responsible  since  January  1st,  1917,  for  the  administration  of  the 
County  Almshouse,  the  County  Hospital,  the  Poor  Farm,  and  also  the  County 
Workhouse  and  Penitentiary. 

Under  the  County  Commissioner  is  the  well  'organized  Department  of 
Child  Welfare  which  has  the  supervision  and  care  of  all  children  supported 
by  public  funds  in  the  County.  This  department  also  administers  the  Coun¬ 
ty’s  Mothers’  Allowance  Fund  from  which,  with  the  consent  of  the  local  Su¬ 
pervisor,  or  city  commissioner  of  charities,  regular  monthly  relief  may  be 
granted  to  a  mother  to  maintain  her  young  children  with  her  in  her  own 
home.  This  system  has  been  in  operation  in  all  of  the  towns  of  the  County 
except  Cortlandt  where  the  Supervisor  at  present  in  office  for  a  long  time  re¬ 
fused  to  approve  the  granting  of  any  such  allowances. 

Practically  the  only  duties  and  powers  now  left  to  the  overseers  of  the 
poor  are  the  administration  of  temporary  relief  and  the  commitment  of  poor 
to  the  almshouse.  Even  the  administration  of  temporary  relief  is  limited. 
By  virtue  of  the  powers  of  his  office,  the  County  Commissioner  decides  in  dis¬ 
puted  cases  whether  the  person  to  be  relieved  has  a  year’s  settlement  in  the 
County,  and  if  so,  in  which  township  he  is  settled.  In  this  way  he  determines1 
which  town  should  be  responsible  for  the  care  of  such  a  person. 

By  section  23  of  the  Poor  Law  it  is  provided  that:  “No  greater  sum 
than  ten  dollars  shall  be  expended  or  paid  for  the  relief  of  any  one  poor  per¬ 
son  or  family  without  the  sanction,  in  writing,  of  one  of  the  superintendents 
of  the  poor  of  the  County ....  except  when  the  Board  of  Supervisors  or  Town 
7*  Board  has  made  rules  and  regulations  as  prescribed  in  section  13.” 

Section  13  provides  that:  “The  Board  of  Supervisors  of  any  County 
may  make  such  rules  and  regulations  as  it  may  deem  proper  in  regard  to 
the  manner  of  furnishing  temporary  or  out-door  relief  to  the  poor  in  the 
several  towns  in  said  County,  and  provided  the  Board  of  Supervisors  shall 
have  failed  to  make  any  such  rules  and  regulations  the  Town  Board  of  any 
town  may  make  such  rules  and  regulations  as  it  may  deem  proper  in  regard 
to  furnishing  temporary  or  out-door  relief  to  the  poor  in  their  respective 
towns  by  the  overseer  or  overseers  of  the  poor  thereof,  and  also  in  regard  to 
^3  the  amount  such  overseer  or  overseers  of  the  poor  may  expend  for  the  relief 
r  of  each  person  or  family .”  If  such  regulations  are  made  by  either  the  Super- 


5 


visors  or  the  Town  Board,  the  Superintendent’s  (Commissioner’s)  signature 
is  not  needed. 

These  sections  when  it  is  sought  to  apply  them  are  not  free  from  ambi¬ 
guity.  The  Supervisors  apparently  are  given  no  power  to  fix  amounts  of  re¬ 
lief.  The  Town  Boards  have  no  power  to  do  so  if  the  Supervisors  regulate' 
the  manner  of  affording  relief.  In  the  absence  of  regulations  by  either,  what 
period  does  the  ten  dollar  limitation  cover?  Is  it  ten  dollars  at  one  time,  or 
during  any  fixed  period  as  a  month,  or  a  year,  or  a  term  of  office  or  what? 

The  first  of  these  ambiguities  is  avoided  in  Westchester  County  by  the 
entire  failure  of  the  Supervisors  to  make  any  regulations.  The  only  reason¬ 
able  solution  of  the  other  is  that  the  ten  dollar  limit  is  on  expenditure  not 
yet  approved  and  audited  and  perhaps  paid  by  the  Town  Board;  or  else  that 
it  refers  to  the  period  of  three  months  within  which  such  bills  are  required 
regularly  to  be  settled.  (Sec.  25). 

It  should  be  noted,  however,  that  some  years  ago  it  was  held  that  if  the 
Town  Board  subsequently  approved  an  expenditure  in  excess  of  the  ten  dol¬ 
lars  and  ordered  it  paid,  the  payment  would  not  be  restrained  at  the  suit  of 
a  taxpayer  in  the  absence  of  fraud  or  wrongful  intent.  (36  N.  Y.  S.  R.  457). 

Procedure  in  Poor  Relief 

A  poor  person  in  order  to  obtain  town  aid  must  make  application,  or  have 
it  made  for  him,  to  the  overseer  of  the  poor. 

The  overseer  is  then  required  by  law  to  make  a  personal  investigation  of 
the  person  or  family  for  whom  aid  is  asked. 

He  is  required  to  record  the  alleged  poor  person’s  name,  age,  number  of 
children,  native  country,  and  reasons  for  needing  relief. 

He  must  find  out  if  the  applicant  has  a  legal  settlement  of  one  year’s  resi¬ 
dence  in  the  town,  and  whether  help  is  really  needed. 

If  it  appears  that  the  person  requires  permanent  assistance,  it  is  the  over¬ 
seer’s  duty  to  commit  the  person  to  the  almshouse* 

The  overseer  is  usually  required  by  the  town  board  to  give  a  written 
“poor-relief”  order,  not  an  oral  one,  to  the  dealer  on  whom  the  order  is  to  be 
drawn. 

He  is  required  to  make  an  audit  of  all  such  bills. 

He  is  also  required  to  make  a  monthly  examination  into  the  condition 
and  necessities  of  poor  persons  being  relieved  by  the  town,  to  determine 
whether  they  are  still  in  need,  and  if  so,  to  what  extent. 

Administration  of  Outdoor  Relief 

QUALIFICATIONS  OF  OVERSEERS 

All  overseers  in  office  in  Westchester  County  at  the  time  of  our  investi¬ 
gation  were  old  residents  of  their  towns  and  had  a  fairly  wide  acquaintance 
with  the  poor  residents. 

Age:  The  average  age  of  the  overseers  was  46.8  years.  Two  of  those  in¬ 
terviewed  appeared  to  be  too  old  for  the  efficient  administration  of  their  office. 

Length  of  Service:  The  average  length  of  service  of  overseers  in  office  in 
1916  was  over  eight  and  one  half  years. 


6 


Length  of  Residence:  Their  average  length  of  residence  in  a  town  was 
32  years. 

Regular  Occupation:  The  twenty-five  overseers  in  office  in  Westchester 
County  were  regularly  engaged  outside  their  official  duties  as  overseer,  in 


the  following  occupations: 

Laborers  .  1 

Small  farming  .  2 

Marble  cutter  .  1 

Contractor  .  2 

Blacksmith  .  1 

Painter  and  decorator  .  4 

Baggage  master  .  1 

Bar-keeper  . . ; .  1 

Florist  .  1 

Agent  .  1 

General  farmer  .  1 

Tinsmith  .  1 

Road  patrolman  .  1 

Miller  .  1 

Horse  trainer  .  1 

No  occupation .  5 

Total . 25 

Previous  Occupation 

Same  as  stated  above . 18 

Mail  driver  .  1 

Butcher  .  1 

Machinist  .  1 

Blacksmith  .  1 

Auto  shop  .  1 

Miller  .  1 

Musician,  clerk .  1 

Total . 25 

Habits 


The  judgment  of  the  investigator  as  to  the  habits  of  the  overseers  may 


be  summed  up  as  follows: 

“Good”  .  9 

“Probably  good”  .  1 

“Clean”  . ! . 2 

“Drinks  a  little”  .  3 

“Reported  questionable”  .  1 

“Commonly  reported  as  drunkard”  .  2 

Time  of  investigator  not  sufficient  to  ascertain 
personal  habits  .  7 

Total . 25 


7 


Desire  Re-election 

Of  the  overseers  in  office,  their  desire  for  re-election  may  be  summed 
up  as  follows: 

Desire  re-election  . 19 

Do  not  desire  re-election .  2 

Indifferent  about  it .  4 

Total . 25 

Reasons  for  attitude  toward  Re-election 

By  those  who  desire  re-election  the  following  reasons  were  assigned. 

For  the  pay  simply .  7 

For  the  pay  and  the  enjoyment  of  the  work .  6 

Because  “doesn’t  mind  it”  . 2 

Because  hates  to  get  beaten  .  2 

Because  likes  the  official  position  .  2 

Total .  19 

Of  those  who  did  not  desire  re-election,  or  were  in  doubt  about  it,  the  fol¬ 
lowing  were  assigned  as  the  reasons: 

Not  enough  pay . 5 

Too  busy  .  1 

Total  .  6 

Remuneration  Received 

$4.00  per  day  for  each  day  of  service . 11 

2.00  per  day  for  each  day  of  service .  3 

(under  the  law  the  latter  are  now  entitled  to  $4.00 
a  day) 

Salaries,  $1,200.00  a  year  . '. .  2 

1,000.00  a  year  .  4 

750.00  a  year  .  2 

350.00  a  year  .  1 

No  pay  .  2 

Total  . 25 

Other  Public  Office  held  in  the  Past  by  Overseers 

Fire  Warden  .  1 

Town  Constable  (holding  office  also  while  overseer) .  1 

Town  Auditor  .  1 

Truant  Officer .  1 

No  public  office.  (1  a  member  of  Republican  Commit¬ 
tee  of  County)  . 21 

Total  . . . .' . 25  ' 

Education 

Barely  able  to  write  .  1 

A  few  grades  of  grammar  school .  1 

Completed  the  grammar  school  . 16 

High  School  .  5 

Education  not  reported  . 2 

Education  reported  beyond  High  School  .  0 

Total . 25 


8 


Irregular  Practices  of  Overseers 

Amount  of  Outdoor  Relief  per  Family 

In  the  year  1916  the  amount  of  relief  given  to  single  families  ranged  from 
a  few  dollars  up  to  between  four  hundred  and  five  hundred  dollars  in  indivi¬ 
dual  cases. 

Clothing 

Several  overseers  would  not  give  to  poor  persons  any  orders  to  obtain 
clothing  at  the  town’s  expense.  Others  gave  sometimes  complete  outfits. 

Luxuries 

In  eleven  cases  the  overseers  furnished  luxuries  at  town  expense  to  the 
poor.  In  seven  cases  no  luxuries  whatever  were  allowed  and  not  even  sugar. 
In  seven  cases  it  was  not  possible  to  examine  supplies  given  to  the  poor  in 
sufficient  detail  to  find  out  about  luxuries. 

We  have  classed  as  table  luxuries  the  following  items  allowed  by  over¬ 
seers:  oysters,  oranges,  mixed  nuts,  jars  of  jam,  coffee  at  36^  per  lb.  (pre-war 
price),  lamb  chops,  expensive  cheese,  honey,  jumbles,  cake  and  catsup. 

It  is  probably  true  that  many  of  the  taxpayers  helping  to  support  the 
poor  cannot  afford  to  purchase  commodities  of  the  quality  and  at  the  price  of 
those  supplied  to  the  indigent  in  the  instances  cited. 

Excessive  Transportation  Rates 

Mileage  charged  by  overseers  to  East  View  (the  almshouse)  and  return 
averaged  twenty-two  and  a  half  cents  a  mile.  Individual  rates  ranged  from 
thirteen  cents  a  mile  to  thirty-one  cents  a  mile.  Even  the  lowest  rate  is  an 
excessive  charge  for  mileage. 

Legal  Services 

In  some  towns  the  overseer  was  allowed  to  employ  legal  services  and  in 
other  towns  not.  In  one  town  the  sum  of  $620.00  was  charged  for  one  year’s 
legal  services  to  the  overseer.  Of  this  amount,  eleven  days  at  $15.00,  a  total 
of  $165.00,  was  charged  for  making  out  for  the  two  overseers,  their  annual  re¬ 
port  to  the  Commissioner  of  Charities. 

Tramps  and  Transients 

There  does  not  appear  to  be  any  authorization  in  the  law  for  overseers  to 
help  transients.  Nevertheless,  the  practice  varies  greatly  in  this  respect. 
Some  towns  gave  help  regularly  to  transients,  and  in  eleven  towns  no  help 
at  all  was  given  to  tramps. 

Medical  Relief 

The  investigator  found  the  charges  of  doctors  varying  from  fifty  cents  to 
two  dollars  a  call.  It  would  seem  as  though  some  regular  but  adequate  fee 
should  be  established  for  poor  calls  within  a  certain  radius. 

Unnecessary  Support 

Several  cases  of  unnecessary  support  were  reported.  One  instance  was 
found  by  the  Bureau  of  a  woman  who  admitted  that  she  had  no  need  for  the 
town  aid  that  she  received.  She  had  been  told  by  business  friends  that  she 
might  as  well  have  it  because  others  were  getting  it,  so  she  applied  for  it  and 
got  it. 


9 


Insufficient  Support 

Cases  of  insufficient  support  were  sporadic  and  exceptional.  In  the  case 
of  seven  overseers,  however,  the  support  given  to  the  indigent  was  in  many 
cases  not  sufficient  for  their  needs. 

Absence  of  Constructive  Plan 

Only  two  of  the  overseers  seemed  to  have  any  constructive  plan  for  giv¬ 
ing  relief.  The  care  of  the  sick  was  usually  deficient.  Having  once  assigned 
a  doctor  to  the  case,  the  overseer  seemed  to  feel  that  he  had  done  his  whole 
duty.  One  overseer  was  active  in  his  efforts  to  remedy  physical  disabilities, 
resorting  to  surgical  operations  or  taking  other  definite  means  to  enable  the 
disabled  and  dependent  to  become  self-supporting.  A  constructive  plan  of 
relief  with  definite  object  of  restoring  the  poor  to  self-support  was  otherwise 
something  that  none  of  the  overseers  appeared  to  understand  with  any  de¬ 
gree  of  thoroughness. 

Finding  Work  for  the  Unemployed 

This  is  another  feature  of  relief  that  seemed  to  be  generally  disregarded. 
Seven  overseers  gave  no  assistance  in  finding  work.  Eighteen  “sQmetimes” 
helped  a  man  to  get  a  job. 

Feebleminded  Poor 

Institutional  care  of  the  feebleminded  seemed  to  be  disregarded  gener¬ 
ally.  It  would  seem  that  the  feebleminded  poor  should  be  segregated.  This 
is  particularly  true  of  adult  females  in  order  to  prevent  indiscriminate  pro¬ 
pagation  of  defectives. 

Inaccessibility  of  Overseers 

In  numerous  instances  overseers  were  reported  as  almost  inaccessible. 
The  result  is  that  really  needy  cases  have  suffered  from  lack  of  relief.  Two 
cases  were  found  where  such  inaccessibility  was  due  to.  neglect.  One  over¬ 
seer  is  reported  to  have  purposely  made  it  difficult  to  find  him  in  order  to  de¬ 
crease  the  number  of  requests  for  relief.  In  general,  however,  such  inacces¬ 
sibility  is  due  to  pre-occupation  of  overseers  in  personal  business,  some  over¬ 
seers  being  occupied  their  full  time  in  outside  work.  In  the  latter  cases, 
three,  although  paid  a  salary  of  $1,000.00  a  year  each,  were  engaged  in  full 
time  occupation  outside.  Four  overseers  were  found  to  devote  full  time  to  the 
duties  of  their  office. 

Sale  of  Liquor  to  the  Poor  Permitted 

Only  two  overseers  were  interviewed  who  knew  that  they  had  legal  au¬ 
thority  to  prohibit  the  sale  of  liquor  to  persons  receiving  town  aid.  This  is  a 
very  important  provision  of  the  law  and  every  overseer  should  know  it  and 
enforce  it. 

Distinction  between  Town  and  County  Charges 

It  would  seem  impossible  that  an  overseer  of  the  poor  should  be  found 
who  did  not  know  the  distinction  between  county  poor  and  town  poor,  and 
how  the  support  of  each  class  should  be  charged,  yet  several  overseers  of  the 
poor  were  found  who  were  ignorant  of  this  distinction. 


10 


Little  Co-operation  with  Private  Charities 

There  is,  on  the  part  of  the  overseers,  little  co-operation  with  private 
charities  in  most  of  the  towns.  As  a  result,  in  nearly  all  towns  there  is  du¬ 
plication  of  relief  by  the  several  independent  agencies.  Social  workers  often 
discover  more  needy  families  than  their  organizations  can  help  adequately. 
Under  a  proper  system  of  co-operation  all  such  families  could  be  relieved; 
and  extreme  suffering  avoided,  in  the  case  of  certain  families  which  feel  per¬ 
haps  too  keenly  what  they  have  been  taught  to  consider  the  disgrace  of  ap¬ 
plying  for  public  relief. 

Automobile  Hire 

Automobile  hire  for  the  transportation  of  poor  persons  was  in  many  cases 
excessive.  It  would  seem  to  be  unnecessary  to  use  automobiles  except  in 
cases  of  pressing  emergency.  However,  one  overseer  was  found  to  spend  over 
$3,000.00  of  the  town  funds  for  automobile  hire  in  the  year  1916 — enough  then 
to  buy  five  Ford  cars  and  pay  for  gasoline  and  oil  to  operate  them  for  a  year. 
Practices  in  transportation  varied.  Several  overseers  used  trains  and  buses 
for  transportation,  and  never  hired  automobiles  except  in  the  case  of  sick¬ 
ness.  Others  were  found  who  never  used  anything  but  automobiles  for  travel 
connected  with  their  office. 

Further  Irregularities 

Many  towns  in  Westchester  County  have  violated  the  State  Law  govern¬ 
ing  temporary  relief.  As  previously  stated  herein,  Sec.  13  of  the  Poor  Law 
gives  the  Town  Board  authority  to  adopt  rules  and  regulations  for  out-door 
relief  when  the  Supervisors  have  failed  to  do  so.  In  cases  where  the  Town 
Board  has  made  such  provision,  overseers  may  legally  expend  any  amount 
so  authorized  without  awaiting  permission  of  the  County  Commissioner. 
They  need  consult  the  Town  Board  only  as  directed  in  such  provision.  But 
since  none  of  the  towns  visited  had  any  such  regulation  as  provided  by  Sec. 
13,  the  overseer  in  each  case  was  controlled  by  Sec.  23  of  the  Poor  Law.  This 
section  requires  him,  in  the  absence  of  such  regulations,  to  get  the  written 
consent  of  the  town  supervisor  for  any  relief  under  ten  dollars,  and  the 
written  consent  of  both  supervisor  and  County  Commissioner  whenever  the 
total  amount  granted  to  any  one  family  or  person  shall  exceed  ten  dollars. 

Some  overseers  interpreted  the  law  to  allow  ten  dollars  a  year  to  a  fam¬ 
ily  without  the  overseer’s  consulting  anyone;  others  thought  the  law  allowed 
ten  dollars  a  month,  and  two  thought  that  no  limit  was  set  in  total  amount, 
but  merely  a  limit  of  ten  dollars  at  a  time.  We  have  suggested  above  what 
seems  to  us  a  more  probable  construction.  Whether  or  not  this  law  is  a  wise 
one,  it  is  pointed  out  as  above  that  it  is  not  carried  out  in  Westchester  Coun¬ 
ty.  Each  Town  Board  that  desires  to  legalize  such  practices  as  described 
should  pass  resolutions  pursuant  to  Sec.  13  of  the  Poor  Law. 


11 


LIBRARY  1 —  _ 

UNIVFRSITY  CSF 


Degree  of  Knowledge  of  and  Compliance  With  the  Law 
By  Overseers  of  the  Poor 


THE  LAW  OVERSEERS’  PRACTICE 

Personal  Investigation 

Sec.  20  of  the  Poor  Law  requires  3  made  no  personal  investigation, 
personal  investigation  by  the  over-  22  stated  that  they  made  personal  in¬ 
seer  of  all  applications  for  relief.  vestigations. 

Legal  Settlement 

Sec.  40  of  the  Poor  Law  requires  3  did  not  know  the  definition  of  a 
settlement  of  one  year  before  the  legal  settlement, 

person  may  be  made  a  town  charge.  22  were  correct  in  their  interpreta- 

tation. 

Permanent  Outdoor  Relief 


Sec.  20  of  the  Poor  Law  requires 
that  permanent  relief  and  support 
be  furnished  only  in  the  almshouse 
unless  the  poor  person  is  incapable 
of  being  removed  to  the  almshouse. 

Monthly 


21  illegally  granted  permanent  relief 
outside  of  the  almshouse 
4  did  not  grant  permanent  outdoor 
relief. 


Investigations 


Sec.  25  of  the  Poor  Law  seems  to  13  made  no  monthly  investigations, 
require  overseers  to  make  a  month¬ 
ly  investigation  into  the  condition  12  made  monthly  investigations, 
and  necessities  of  the  town  poor 
outside  of  institutions. 


Audit  of  Bills  by  Overseer 


Sec.  25  of  the  Poor  Law  seems  to 
require  the  audit  and  allowance  by 
the  overseer  of  all  bills  against  the 
town  for  things  furnished  to  poor 
persons  pursuant  to  his  orders  or 
otherwise. 


17  made  no  audit. 
8  made  audit. 


Compelling  Support  When  Capable 


Chap.  143  of  the  laws  of  1913  re-  3  ignorant  of  this  law. 
quires  the  support  of  poor  persons  by 
Darents  or  children  of  poor  when  ca^  22  aware  of  it. 
pable. 

Record  of  Overseers 


Sec.  26  of  the  Poor  Law  requires 
overseers  to  record  name,  age,  sex, 
and  native  country  of  every  poor  per¬ 
son  relieved  by  them — also  statement 
of  cause  necessitating  relief. 


7  kept  incomplete  records. 

17  complete  for  most  of  the  people 
relieved. 

1  overseer  kept  complete  records 
about  every  case. 


Illegal  Practices  of  Towns 


THE  L  AW  PRACTICE  OF  TOWN  AUTHORITIES 

Itemization 


Sec.  175  of  the  Town  Law  reads  15  towns  had  incomplete  itemiza- 
“All  accounts  and  claims  against  tion. 

the  towns  must  be  made  out  in  items 
verified  by,  or  in  behalf  of  the  3  correct, 
claimant,”  and  similar  and  more 
stringent  provision  is  found  in  Sec. 

25  of  the  Poor  Law. 


12 


Verification 

Sec.  25  of  the  Poor  Law  requires  8  towns  had  improper  verification, 
that  poor  claims  or  accounts  be  veri¬ 
fied  by  the  claimant  to  the  effect  that 

such  care,  support,  supplies,  or  at-  10  towns  had  correct  verification, 
tendance  have  been  actually  furnish¬ 
ed  for  such  poor  persons;  that  such 
poor  persons  have  actually  received 
the  same,  and  that  prices  charged 
therefor  are  reasonable  and  not 
above  the  usual  market  rates. 

Payment  of  Poor  Bills  Every  Three  Months 
Sec.  25  of  the  Poor  Law  requires  2  towns  did  not  pay  every*  three 
that  poor  bills  be  settled  once  in  months. 

every  three  months.  16  towns  paid  every  three  months. 

Contribution  to  Private  Charities 


Art.  VIII,  Sec.  10  of  the  State  con¬ 
stitution  reads  “No  county,  city, 
town,  or  village,  shall  hereafter  give 
any  money  or  property  or  loan  its 
money  or  credit  to,  or  in  aid  of  any 
individual,  association  or  corporation. 


3  towns  made  apparently  illegal 
contributions  to  private  chari¬ 
ties. 

15  did  not. 


Compliance  with  Insanity  Law  by  Towns  and  Overseers 


Sec.  84  of  the  Insanity  Law  re¬ 
quires  that  the  fees  of  physicians 
employed  by  health  officers  for  the 
purpose  of  examining  alleged  insane 
persons  are  to  be  allowed  by  the 
judge  ordering  commitment,  certi¬ 
fied  to  and  by  the  County  Treasur¬ 
er  and  charged  to  the  municipality 
liable  therefor. 


15  towns  failed  to  meet  these  re¬ 
quirements. 

3  complied  with  the  law. 


Illegal  Payments  to  Overseers 


Chap.  542  of  the  Laws  of  1915,  Sec. 
1  provides  for  compensation  for  over¬ 
seers  as  follows: 

a.  $2  per  day  unless  a  different 
rate  be  fixed  by  or  pursuant  to 
this  section. 


12  towns  made  illegal  payments  to 
their  overseers. 

Of  these: 

2  towns  paid  only  $2  a  day. 


b.  Board  of  Supervisors  of  Coun¬ 
ty  may  by  resolution,  fix  the 
compensation  at  more  than  $2 
but  not  more  than  $4  per  day. 
(Such  a  resolution  has  been 
passed  in  Westchester  County 
and  here  non-salaried  over¬ 
seers  dre  entitled  to  $4  for 
each  day’s  work  as  overseer) . 

c.  Town  board  of  town  who^e  as¬ 
sessed  valuation  of  taxable  real 
and  persona]  property  is  ten 
million  dollars  or  more  may  al¬ 
low  not  over  $1,000  a  year  in 
lieu  of  the  per  diem  compensa¬ 
tion  provided  by  this  section. 


All  except  two  paid  full  day’s  pay  for 
only  a  part  day’s  work. 

6  towns  made  no  illegal  payments 
to  overseers. 


1  town  paid  $1,200  each  to  two 
elected  overseers  though  limited 
by  law  to  $1,000. 


13 


d.  If  compensation  is  fixed  on  per 
diem  basis,  he  shall  not  be  en¬ 
titled  to  receive  more  than  one 
day’s  compensation  on  account 
of  services  performed  on  the 
same  calendar  day. 

Audit  of  Own  Bills 

Sec.  13  of  the  Town  Law  reads: 

A  member  of  the  town  board  or 
board  of  town  auditors  shall  not 
present  for  audit  a  claim  or  demand 
against  the  town  assigned  to  him 
by  another  in  which  he  is  directly 
or  indirectly  interested,  except 

a.  His  per  diem  compensation  for 
attendance  upon  meetings  of 
the  town  board,  and 

b.  The  fees  allowed  to  him  by 
law  for  services  rendered  in 
his  official  capacity. 

Further  Illegalities 

Report  of  Poor  Expenditures  by  Town  Supervisors 

Sec.  141  of  the  Poor  Law  provides 
that: 

The  supervisor  of  every  town  None  of  the  town  supervisors  made 
where  all  the  poor  are  not  a  county  a  report  complying  with  this  law. 

charge,  shall  report  to  the  clerk  of 
the  board  of  supervisors  within  fif¬ 
teen  days  after  the  accounts  of  the 
overseer  of  the  poor  have  been  set¬ 
tled  by  the  town  board  at  its  first  an¬ 
nual  meeting  in  each  year,  giving  an 
abstract  of  all  such  accounts,  which 
shall  exhibit,  the  number  of  poor 
persons  that  have  been  relieved  or 
supported  in  such  town  during  the 
preceding  year,  specifying: 

a.  The  number  of  county  poor 
and  town  poor. 

b.  The  whole  expense  of  such  sup¬ 
port. 

c.  The  allowance  made  to  over¬ 
seers,  justices,  constables,  or 
other  officers  which  shall  not 
comprise  any  part  of  the  ac¬ 
tual  expenses  of  maintaining 
the  poor. 


This  provision  of  subdivision  “d”  has 
been  frequently  violated,  though  vio¬ 
lations  are  not  always  easy  to  de¬ 
tect.  One  overseer  charged  and  was 
paid  per  diem  compensation  for  366 
days  in  the  year  1916. 

by  Town  Board 

At  least  one  town  violated  this  law. 


14 


Cost  of  Public  Outdoor  Kelief  in  the  Townships 

In  the  year  1916  the  eighteen  townships  of  Westchester  County  expended 
$82,156.27  for  outdoor  poor  relief.  Of  that  amount,  $20,823.35  was  spent  for 
the  compensation  of  overseers  and  for  their  expenses.  In  other  words,  it 
costs  practically  $1.00  extra  to  spend  $3.00  for  relief,  or  to  put  it  another  way, 
to  give  a  person  a  dollar’s  worth  of  relief,  it  costs  an  average  of  one  and  one 
third  dollars  to  the  tax  payer. 

It  is  the  belief  of  the  Bureau  that  a  well  organized  social  service  depart¬ 
ment  employing  five  or  six  trained  investigators  each  equipped  with  an  in¬ 
expensive  car  for  traversing  the  large  distances  that  sometimes  have  to  be 
covered,  and  each  authorized  to  administer  temporary  relief  under  the  con¬ 
trol  of  the  County  Commissioner  of  Charities,  could  bring  about  much  more 
acceptable  conditions  among  the  poor,  put  many  of  the  present  paupers  back 
into  self  supporting  conditions,  deal  much  more  scientifically  and  satisfactorily 
with  cases  demanding  institutional  care,  and  cost  the  tax  payer  less  as  a  whole 
than  the  towns  now  pay  for  a  very  inadequate  and  improperly  administered 
system  of  care  for  the  poor. 

The  following  table  shows  how  the  $82,136.27  was  apportioned  by  the  dif¬ 
ferent  towns  among  various  headings. 


15 


1916 

Amounts  expended  by  the  Several  Towns  of  Westchester  County  for  Outdoor  Relief  of  the  Poor. 


-  E 

<U  £ts 

—  +*  <v 

4>  - - 

c cl 


01-0 
3  0) 

Q^° 


c  c 

ns  o 

HI  ns 


ns 


w 

£"E 

o  ns 
o  o 
ccm 

<3  M 


L-  w 

(U-- 

o  > 
o  o 

£_  t_ 

QD. 


00  00 
c— 
cq 


.  CD 
CD 
.  <M 


o  o  o  o  o 
o  o  o  o  o 
o  o  o  o  o 

(M  M  l>  D 


05  t—  CD 
^  O0  N 


LO  lO  CO  I>  o 

05  O  05  CD  OO 

rjn  OO  C<j  CO  O 

Tf  O  lO  M  CO 

C©  05  rH 


o  t- 
LO  OO 
cq 


o  O  o 
O  ©  §  lO 
cq  oo  cd 
^  ^  oo 


t-  •  LO 

LO  •  t- 

CD  '  OO 

CD  cq 

€0- 


05 

cq 

O 

o 

05 

00 

O 

O 

CO 

O 

cq 

oo 

LO 

05 

CO 

L>; 

LO 

rH 

© 

oo 

© 

rH 

H 

H 

© 

05 

05 

00 

LO 

© 

L— 

00 

cq 

1—1 

o 

cq 

05 

cq 

t- 

O 

rH 

00 

rH 

o 

oo 

CD 

©^ 

rH_ 

rH 

1— 1 

cq 

rH 

LO 

T— 1 

rH 

00 

r-T 

oo 

CD 

00 

cq 

o 

CD 

cq 

oo 

O 

OO 

LO 

O 

LO 

cq 

LO 

CD 

LO 

i— i 

r— 1 

LO 

© 

t- 

00 

rH 

cq 

c~* 

rH 

o 

LO 

05 

05 

c— 

co 

cq" 

00 

00 

cq 

CD 

CD 

cq 

05 

c— 

1— i 

CD 

rH 

r— 1 

LO 

cq 

CO 

LO 

LO 

CD 

05 

rH 

rH 

tH 

eo- 

o 

'C 

O 

O 

® 

O 

LO 

cq 

LO 

t> 

© 

© 

H 

cq 

LO 

H 

© 

CO 

o 

CD 

LO 

CD 

00 

oo 

rh 

LO 

LO 

CD 

<&r 

rH 

oo 

05 

cq 

i> 

CD 

O 

OO 

CO 

® 

tH 

O 

O 

LO 

CD 

O 

l£> 

cq 

© 

t- 

rH 

CD 

© 

cq 

cq 

00 

© 

© 

05 

© 

rH 

00 

,_5 

© 

LO 

LO 

CD 

© 

© 

© 

CD 

ci 

© 

rH 

CO 

r- 

05 

cq 

C— 

Tt< 

00 

CD 

LO 

LO 

00 

rh 

cq 

cq 

00 

rH 

© 

t> 

i— i 

C5_ 

05 

cq 

OO 

cq 

05 

00 

cq 

©^ 

LO 

cq 

rH 

1— 1 

i— 1 

rt“ 

rH 

CO 

00 

LO~ 

05 

rCj  ^ 

he 

O'  -l-> 
S-1  r/5 


<D 


U  5  -2  «  to 

a  S  §  5  *c 

'O  j-<  <x>  5S  *3 

cd  o  f-i  _™  ,  ® 


I 


ctf  c3 
O  CQ 


®  ca 

>5  C 

K  CQ 


fl 
£ 

co  o 

g  ^ 

n 


1C 


$82,156.27  $4,132.44  $7,592.15  $26,062.52  $95.32  $3,482.23  $4,879.07  $1,015.42  $668.80  $2,074.91 


Compen-  Care  of  Mis- 

Guardlng  Auto  sation  Expenses  Legal  Soldiers'  cellane- 

insane  Burials  Hire  Overseers  Overseers  Hospital  Services  Printing  Graves  ous 


CO 

o 

. 

LO 

CO 

LO 

LO 

oo 

Oi 

LO 

LO 

o 

CO 

CO 

CO 

LO 

© 

TjH 

cd 

cd 

cd 

cd 

cd 

00 

It1 

LO 

o 

os 

OS 

CO 

1—^ 

<cq 

1—1 

i—i 

oo 

1—1 

1—1 

€23- 

* 

6^- 

© 

o 

© 

cd 

cd 

<cq 

625- 

© 

© 

LO 

LO 

r- 

cd 

LO 

CO 

© 

60- 

6«- 

O 

o 

o 

o 

o 

© 

o 

CO 

o 

© 

© 

CO 

o 

LO 

d 

rd 

Oq 

rH 

<cq 

T— 1 

<cq 

© 

CO 

© 

€23- 

65- 

O 

CO 

o 

o 

CD 

o 

LO 

OS 

© 

© 

CO 

00 

t-H 

CO 

o 

CO 

© 

CO 

CO 

© 

© 

OS 

c— 

o 

OO 

00 

if 

d 

td 

d 

LO 

T— 1 

cd 

t-H 

if 

CO 

CO 

LO 

o 

t~ 

o 

i 

00 

© 

LO 

CO 

CO 

rH 

if 

CO 

C<J 

tH 

cd 

© 

60- 

€23- 

00 

t~ 

00 

LO 

CO 

CO 

o 

if 

o 

LO 

© 

© 

CO 

if 

i— 1 

cr 

t- 

© 

CO 

CO 

1—1 

<cq 

cd 

cd 

If 

OS 

1—1 

cd 

tH 

if 

cd 

oo 

CO 

if 

CO 

LO 

LO 

OO 

r- 

CNJ 

CO 

CO 

oo 

i— i 

tH 

t> 

i— 1 

cd 

€23- 

€23- 

o 

o 

00 

o 

o 

o 

© 

> 

o 

o 

LO 

© 

o 

CO 

© 

>  © 

© 

© 

o 

© 

CO 

© 

© 

© 

e 

> 

© 

if 

CO 

© 

© 

os 

© 

>  © 

© 

CO 

© 

LO 

CO 

© 

If 

© 

© 

> 

d 

os 

if 

cd 

d 

OS 

Tt 

<  LO 

T - 1 

LO 

I— 

t- 

OS 

LO 

r- 

L- 

o 

> 

o 

OS 

t- 

tH 

o 

OS 

1— 

1  © 

© 

© 

co 

CO 

OS 

tH 

© 

> 

LO 

CO 

t—I 

CD 

OS 

1— 1 

TP 

cd 

1— i 

i— 1 1 

i— 1 

i—l 

T—I 

cd 

i—i 

€23- 

o 

LO 

o 

LO 

o 

e 

► 

o 

o 

o 

O 

o 

© 

.  © 

© 

© 

© 

© 

co 

© 

LO 

LO 

© 

© 

LO 

© 

© 

;  © 

© 

CO 

cd 

LO 

CO 

T— 1 

OS 

CD 

cd 

d 

d 

td 

© 

d 

>  © 

LO’ 

OS 

LO 

CO 

CO 

if 

If 

o 

oo 

CO 

c— 

<M 

i  <cq 

<M 

oo 

1— 1 

i— 1 

LO 

1— 1 

T-l 

i—i 

LO 

€23- 

CO 

id 

€23- 

O 

O 

o 

o 

o 

<= 

> 

o 

o 

o 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

o 

o 

o 

© 

> 

© 

© 

© 

© 

©> 

© 

© 

© 

LO 

© 

© 

d 

> 

d 

d 

d 

LO 

d 

© 

1— 1 

if 

T— 1 

oq 

If 

LO 

oo 

<cq 

if 

If 

<M 

00 

CO 

if 

T“ 0 

1-1 

oq 

T— 1 

€23- 

€23- 

o 

% 

1  ® 

LO 

LO 

OS 

© 

Oq 

cq 

<cq 

I  ♦ 

<CJ 

€23- 

1  €23- 

tH 

o 

'S 

■+o 

s 

t* 

& 

bJD 

tH 

3 

,a 

pj 

G2 

cu 

tH 

a> 

72 

a> 

,£3 

u 

a? 

CJ 

o 

73 

*c 

tH 

o 

tH 

o 

7! 

S' 

<5 

Pi 

o 

tH 

c3 

£ 

.  Pleasant 

<32 

72 

<S 

Q 

£ 

03 

72 

d 

o 

©5 

tH 

s 

<02 

IS 

m 

"E 

&0 

72 

!  02 
.  be 

g  "E 
S  ^ 

2  d 

5 

<12 

O  ■  ‘ 

*3  72 

tn 

72  o 
rri  S3 

fl 

£ 

o 

■+~j 

<b 

o 

tH 

cd 

<32 

a: 

j 

H-S 

<32 

o 

o 

72 

02  O 

>> 

)  n 

o 

m 

O 

o 

K 

X 

§ 

£ 

■X 

£ 

o 

Oh  Oh 

Pd 

w.  m 

>* 

17 


*  Vouchers  not  on  file  to  explain  this  item. 


LOCAL  CAUSES  OF  CASES  OF  POVERTY 


Replies  to  our  inquiries  as  to  the  local  causes  of  poverty  were  of  great 
variety.  Among  them  we  may  mention  the  following: 

1 —  Saloons 

In  towns  where  there  were  no  saloons,  poor  relief  expenses  were  very 
small  or  entirely  absent.  With  the  presence  of  saloons,  the  contrary  condi¬ 
tion  prevailed.  In  saloon  towns  the  receipts  from  excise  taxes  were  very 
properly  used  for  poor  relief,  but  were  inadequate  to  offset  the  greater  expense. 

2—  Irregular  Employment 

Lack  of  full  time  industries  was  usually  associated  with  poverty,  marked¬ 
ly  so  in  towns  containing  large  villages.  Resultant  wages  were  frequently 
too  low  for  sufficient  support,  the  result  being  that  the  public  must  supplement 
such  low  pay.  How  far  the  lack  of  full  time  employment  was  voluntary  on  the 
part  of  the  employee  is  a  question  into  which  we  were  unable  to  go. 

Little  poverty  was  found  to  exist  in  farming  districts. 

3 —  Shiftless  Foreign  and  Colored  Element 

Overseers  complained,  in  towns  where  there  was  a  considerable  number 
of  Italians  that  the  unskilled  laborers  of  this  race  were  especially  shiftless 
and  likely  to  impose  upon  the  town  with  frequent  requests  for  relief.  Some 
overseers  reported  that  certain  Italians  who  had  thus  obtained  relief  were 
afterwards  found  to  have  savings  bank  accounts.  One  instance  was  found 
where  an  Italian,  particularly  insistent  on  his  bitter  need  of  fuel,  had  traded 
his  fuel  order  partly  for  cash. 

Similar  complaints  were  made  by  overseers  regarding  certain  elements  of 
the  colored  population,  although  these  were  not  so  serious  as  in  the  case  of 
the  Italian  element  described. 

4 —  Desertion  of  Families 

Numerous  cases  of  desertion  were  found,  when  families  were  left  in  grave 
distress.  According  to  the  testimony  of  overseers,  these  desertions  were  most 
numerous  among  Italians. 

5 —  Death  of  Wage  Earning  Husband  or  Father 

This  was  found  locally  to  be  a  frequent  cause  of  poverty.  Admirable  re¬ 
lief  of  widows  is  being  provided  for  through  the  mother’s  allowance  fund  ad¬ 
ministered  by  the  Child  Welfare  Department. 

6 —  Laxness  in  Enforcing  Legal  Settlements 

Where  paupers  find  the  question  of  legal  settlement  not  thoroughly  in¬ 
vestigated,  it  is  much  easier  for  the  shiftless  and  lazy  to  obtain  public  relief. 
Where  the  provisions  of  the 'law  are  rigidly  insisted  upon,  cases  of  poor  re¬ 
lief  are  lets  frequent.  The  applicant  is  more  often  brought  to  earn  his  own 
support. 

7 —  Old  Age,  etc. 

The  prevention  of  dependency  upon  public  relief  in  old  age  calls  for 
serious  study.  The  same  may  be  said  regarding  poverty  resulting  from  sick¬ 
ness,  accident,  feeble-mindedness,  and  other  such  causes.  Such  studies  are 
being  conducted  by  various  bodies. 


18 


r 


The  discussion  of  general  causes  of  poverty  is  far  too  large  a  subject  to 
be  included  in  this  paper.  Volumes  of  study  have  been  given  to  it  by  such 
men  as  Warner,  Glenn,  and  Devine.  Professor  Devine  is  optimistic  on  the 
subject.  It  is  his  belief  that  poverty  can  be  eliminated  from  society.  But 
that  study,  while  akin  to  our  own,  is  social.  Ours  is  legislative  and  adminis¬ 
trative.  We  confine  our  discussion,  therefore,  to  the  existing  poor  law,  its 
practical  enforcement,  its  failures,  and  how  both  the  law  and  its  adminis¬ 
tration  may  be  improved. 

UNSUITABLE  POLITICAL  STRUCTURE 

Political  science  has  not  reached  high  development  in  building  the  sys¬ 
tem  of  administration  for  poor  relief  in  New  York  State.  The  same  fault  is 
noticeable  as  in  the  general  structure  of  our  democratic  government;  viz., 
the  lack  of  useful  centralization,  infinite  variations  of  method,  and  the  impos¬ 
sibility  of  setting  up  a  uniform  system  of  bringing  about  among  administra¬ 
tive  officials,  uniform  understanding  of  the  scope  and  purpose  of  poor  relief. 
A  theoretical  central  executive  with  thirty  or  forty  theoretical  administrative 
subordinates  who  in  many  respects  are  not  his  subordinates,  and  over  whom 
he  has  no  disciplinary  powers,  cannot  be  expected  to  accomplish  much  in  the 
way  of  control  or  performance.  Yet  that  is  what  we  have  in  the  office  of  our 
present  county  Superintendent  of  the  Poor  (or,  in  Westchester  County,  since 
January  1,  1917,  the  Commissioner  of  Charities  and  Corrections),  and  the 
township  overseers  of  the  poor. 

“To  provide  free  food  and  lodging  to  all  who  may  apply  is  easy,  but  there 
is  no  more  difficult  task  than  to  give  “relief.”  The  word  “relief”  is  used  by 
many  people  in  a  personal  sense  to  mean  supplying  the  immediate  needs  of 
an  individual  from  public  funds.  This  is  a  narrow  but  obvious  interpreta¬ 
tion.  The  real  and  only  constructive  meaning  of  the  word  demands  that 
society  and  the  taxpayer  shall  be  “relieved”  as  well  as  the  individual.  To  feed 
and  house,  at  the  expense  of  the  taxpayer,  a  person  who  consumes  his  time 
and  money  in  saloons  is  not  rendering  “relief”  to  him  or  to  the  public.  To 
care  for  a  feeble-minded  woman  during  confinement  and  then  turn  her  out 
into  the  world  again  to  become  the  prey  of  the  unscrupulous  is  not  giving 
“relief”  to  her,  to  her  offspring,  or  to  the  world  at  large.  To  cure  a  patient 
of  tuberculosis  and  then  return  him  in  a  weakened  physical  condition  to  the 
same  occupation  and  surroundings  in  which  he  acquired  the  disease  is  not 
“relief”  to  him  or  to  society.  To  take  children  from  a  competent  mother  and 
place  them  in  an  institution  at  double  the  cost  of  maintaining  the  home,  “re¬ 
lieves”  neither  the  family  nor  the  community.”  (Annual  Report  of  Super¬ 
intendent  of  the  Poor,  V.  E.  Macy). 

Every  effort  should  be  made  to  put  the  needy  on  their  feet  without  mak¬ 
ing  them  objects  of  charity.  It  is  desirable  to  give  back  to  a  man  his  health 
or  strength,  or  to  find  a  position  for  him  even  if  the  initial  expense  to  the  com¬ 
munity  is  great  at  first:  the  public  will  save  in  the  end  and  there  is  no  ques¬ 
tion  as  to  the  benefit  of  the  individual  aided. 


19 


“How  much  better  would  be  such  a  system  of  granting  real  relief  instead 
of  the  present  system  which  is  well  summed  up  by  an  overseer’s  statement, 
‘I  give  them  just  enough  to  make  them  stop  ‘“hollering.”’  Under  such  a  sys¬ 
tem,  the  one  who  ‘hollers’  loudest  is  likely  to  get  the  most  relief,  although  the 
silent  one  may  be  in  the  greatest  need.  It  is  easy  to  see  that  a  substantial 
number  of  people  not  afraid  to  ‘holler’  can  calculate  upon  this  public  relief 
as  a  part  of  their  annual  income  and  be  shiftless  during  the  summer  because 
of  aid  in  the  winter.”  (1916  Conference  of  Charities,  p.  340). 

Assuming  that  Westchester  County  is  typical  of  other  counties  except  as 
to  amounts,  the  tax  paying  public  is  entitled  to  better  results  from  its  invest¬ 
ment  in  poor  relief  than  is  given  under  the  prevalent  practices.  Fundamen¬ 
tally,  poor  relief  should  not  be  a  mere  palliative,  but  should  strike  at  the  root 
of  the  trouble.  It  should  tend  always  to  relieve  the  causes  of  the  poverty 
and  not  merely  feed  and  clothe  the  unfortunate  indigent  or  the  indolent. 

Can  this  country  hope  for  such  desirable  results  from  our  present  system? 

Many  of  the  overseers  are  conscientious  men  trying  to  carry  out  their 
duties  properly.  But  the  mere  intention  is  not  enough.  Good  intentions  alone 
will  not  make  a  skilled  machinist  out  of  a  coal  heaver.  Training  for  pro¬ 
fessional  relief  of  poverty,  and  thorough  knowledge  of  the  state  and  county 
poor  laws  are  necessary  for  success  either  as  a  public  or  as  a  private  charity 
worker.  None  of  the  present  overseers  in  Westchester  County  had  any  pre¬ 
liminary  training  or  instruction  in  the  relief  of  the  poor  and  none  had  com¬ 
pletely  mastered  the  statutes  governing  the  matter.  Yet  as  soon  as  an  overseer 
takes  office,  at  the  time  when  he  is  usually  ignorant  of  the  laws,  he  is  most 
besieged  with  requests  for  aid. 

Government  in  general,  and  poor  relief  in  particular,  are  neither  of  them 
money  making  enterprises.  They  cost  money  and  that  money  has  to  be  sup¬ 
plied  by  the  tax-payers.  Whenever  public  money  is  spent,  adequate  results 
should  be  obtained  for  it.  The  situation  in  this  County  just  described  neces¬ 
sarily  involves  the  conclusion  that  our  money  could  be  spent  more  efficiently, 
that  is  more  economically,  or  in  other  words,  to  better  advantage. 

It  is  like  the  case  of  an  untrained  housekeeper  who  cannot  for  the  same 
money  get  equal  results  with  one  who  knows  her  work  and  does  it.  An  un¬ 
trained  housekeeper  who  does  not  know  her  work  is  not  economical. 

The  task  of  overcoming  this  difficulty  is  not  an  impossible  one,  but  it  in¬ 
volves  radical  change  from  the  present  statutory  system.  To  secure  any 
such  change  it  is  necessary  first  of  all  that  some  considerable  part  of  the 
community  should  become  aware  of  the  actual  present  conditions. 

It  would  be  bad  enough  were  the  overseers  properly  qualified  for  the  per¬ 
formance  of  their  duties,  but  as  is  shown  by  the  facts  grouped  in  the  preced¬ 
ing  pages,  not  only  are  the  great  majority  of  overseers  in  no  way  trained  for 
the  duties  of  their  office,  but  in  many  cases  they  are  not  cognizant  of  the  most 
elementary  provisions  of  the  law,  and  there  appears  to  be  no  practical  means 
of  compelling  them  to  improve  upon  such  conditions  or  alter  them. 

It  is  not  sufficient  to  understand  why  our  political  structure  is  of  such  an 
inefficient  nature.  The  founders  of  our  republic  feared  that  democratic  in¬ 
stitutions  would  suffer  and  tyranny  result,  were  too  much  power  given  to  those 


20 


chosen  to  rule.  The  fear  was  justified  from  previous  experiences  with  tyranny, 
but  our  century  and  a  quarter  of  national  growth  and  political  experience 
and  evolution  brought  home  the  lesson  that  there  can  be  too  much  decentrali¬ 
zation  for  efficiency  as  well  as  too  much  centralization  to  be  consonant  with 
freedom.  No  risk  to  freedom  is  seen  in  a  much  greater  centralization  and  con¬ 
trol  of  poor  relief  than  at  present  obtains;  and  it  is  clear  that  vastly  greater 
efficiency  can  today  be  obtained  in  a  county  like  Westchester  by  a  greater 
centralization  of  poor  relief  along  the  lines  of  county  organization,  especially 
in  view  of  the  great  change  in  the  character  of  the  population  of  the  county, 
which  is  no  longer  a  simple  farming  community  of  persons  permanently  set¬ 
tled  in  particular  farming  districts,  where  each  man  knows  his  neighbor,  but 
a  community  of  the  most  varied  sub-metropolitan  character,  with  a  large 
urban,  or  floating  population. 

The  conditions  shown  by  our  report  are  conditions  which  can  largely  be 
avoided.  It  must  be  apparent  that  the  administration  of  poor  relief  is  a  mat¬ 
ter  not  to  be  left  to  the  discretion  of  incompetents  with  no  conceptions  of  the 
meaning  of  relief,  in  many  cases  inclined  to  ignore  the  troublesome  problems 
of  putting  men  back  on  their  feet,  restoring  their  self-respect,  making  the 
poor  self-supporting,  providing  them  with  employment,  surrounding  them 
with  sanitary  and  healthful  conditions,  and  not  ready  to  consider  and  study 
every  possible  well-reasoned-out  measure  for  enabling  every  citizen  to  work 
out  some  line  of  occupation,  and  with  it  his  independence,  and  that  of  his 
family. 

It  is  clear  that  for  the  proper  conduct  of  such  work  special  knowledge  is 
necessary  as  well  as  an  intelligent  capacity  for  administering  poor  relief.  It 
seems  to  the  student  of  social  problems  that  relief  of  the  poor  is  a  social  func¬ 
tion  calling  for  trained  service.  Until  we  make  legislative  provisions  f  )r 
competent  and  trained  administrative  officers,  working  along  some  definite 
policy,  we  shall  remain  a  long  way  from  realization  of  proper  relief,  and  a 
still  longer  distance  from  the  elimination  of  poverty,  even  though  the  last  ob¬ 
jective  might  be  obtainable. 

Together  with  the  requirement  of  special  training,  of  a  professional  edu¬ 
cation,  so  to  speak,  there  should  go  provision  for  proper  compensation.  The 
facts  we  have  collected  show  that  the  fee  system  of  payment  does  not  work 
satisfactorily.  It  is  inordinately  expensive  in  the  aggregate,  and  doubtless  in 
some  cases  it  results  in  inadequate  compensation.  An  overseer  in  a  small 
town  who  spent  the  time  required  to  gain  a  clear  understanding  of  his  duties, 
and  then  had  only  a  few  cases,  would  be  underpaid,  and  yet  he  could  not 
properly  discharge  his  duties  without  the  knowledge. 

It  is  expensive  to  educate  thirty  men  as  often  as  each  election  occurs  to 
perform  the  duties  which  five  or  six  men  could  perform  more  satisfactorily 
under  a  central  supervision  as  long  as  they  efficiently  and  intelligently  per¬ 
formed  their  duties. 

Unifying  the  control  of  extending  and  continuing  relief  would  also  elim¬ 
inate  a  great  amount  of  unnecessary  work  and  save  some  friction.  The 
work  would  be  better  done,  and  sham  claims  for  relief  would  be  more  easily 


21 


detected.  These  are  important  practical  considerations.  Nor  is  it  at  all  a  bad 
feature  that  it  would  reduce  the  number  of  petty  office-holders. 


CONCLUSIONS  AND  RECOMMENDATIONS 

Conclusions 

The  following  conclusions  seem  to  be  warranted  by  the  conditions: — 

1.  That  the  town  and  county  organizations  as  prescribed  by  statute  for  the 
administration  of  outdoor  relief  are  inadequate  for  the  present  needs  of  West¬ 
chester  County. 

2  That  the  giving  of  alms  at  public  expense  without  discriminating  judg¬ 
ment  as  to  actual  needs  tends  to  increase  instead  of  diminish  pauperism. 

3.  That  the  administration  of  genuine  relief  to  the  poor  in  such  way  as  to 
help  them  to  permanent  rehabilitation  or  to  provide  properly  for  those  per¬ 
manently  disabled  requires  specially  trained  public  officers  versed  in  the  prin¬ 
ciples  of  scientific  relief. 

4.  That  the  present  method  of  electing  or  appointing,  from  the  ordinary  walks 
of  life,  overseers  of  the  poor  who  have  no  training  or  preparation  for  the 
duties  of  their  office,  blocks  the  way  to  decrease  of  pauperism  that  otherwise 
might  be  attained.  Such  officials  apparently  cannot  be  expected  to  possess 
adequate  knowledge  of  the  poor  laws  nor  to  discriminate  between  actual  need 
and  the  opposite,  or  to  build  up  any  plans  for  making  the  poor  permanently 
self-sustaining. 

5.  That  the  decentralization  of  authority  under  the  present  law  permits  wide 
variation  of  practice  and  absence  of  uniformity  in  reports  and  accounts,  re¬ 
sulting  in  confusion  and  mismanagement  on  the  part  of  officials;  and  on  the 
part  of  the  public,  ignorance  of  their  own  interests. 

6.  That  it  seems  unwise  that  the  commitment  of  public  charges  to  asylums 
should  be  entrusted  to  so  many  different  untrained  officers  in  so  small  an  area. 
Interests  so  vital  may  be  effected  by  commitment  to  a  public  institution  that 
the  greatest  possible  care  should  be  exercised  in  making  every  such  commit¬ 
ment. 

7  That  the  system  of  paying  overseers  by  fees  and  on  per  diem  basis  opens 
the  way  to  dishonest  practices,  sometimes  to  enormous  cost  of  poor  relief,  es¬ 
pecially  where  an  overseer  may  charge  a  full  day’s  pay  for  a  few  minutes 
time  spent  in  issuing  a  single  small  order,  which  might  have  been  issued  on 
the  day  of  the  investigation  for  which  a  separate  day’s  pay  is  charged. 

8.  That  the  present  method  of  selecting  merchants  upon  whom  orders  are 
drawn  for  supplies  for  relief  of  the  poor  opens  the  way  to  dishonest  practices 
in  the  way  of  over-charges,  short  deliveries,  and  trading  orders  for  cash  on 
the  part  of  the  paupers.  There  is  no  compulsory  method  of  control  over  such 
dealers. 

9.  That  under  the  present  system  the  law  is  frequently  violated  or  evaded 
While  this  is  largely  due  to  ignorance  of  the  statutes  or  to  the  following  of 
precedents,  in  some  instances  it  has  appeared  to  be  deliberate  and  conscious. 


Recommendations 

It  is  recommended  as  follows: — 

1.  That  the  office  of  overseer  of  the  poor  be  abolished ;  that  in  its  place  a  social 
service  department  be  established  with  trained  workers  under  the  supervision 
and  direction  of  the  County  Commissioner  of  Charities  and  Corrections. 

2.  That  the  amount  and  character  of  temporary  outdoor  relief  to  be  admin¬ 
istered  be  left,  within  definite  bounds,  to  the  discretion  of  such  trained  workers 
with  the  approval  of  the  County  Commissioner  of  Charities  and-  Corrections. 

3.  That  provision  should  be  made  for  monthly  payment  of  bills  for  poor  re¬ 
lief  against  either  the  towns  or  the  county. 

4.  That  merchants  desiring  to  share  in  the  furnishing  of  supplies  should  be 
investigated  by  the  workers  of  the  social  service  department  and  should  be 
selected  on  a  basis  of  quality  and  price  of  their  goods  and  fidelity  of  service, 
and  that  a  method  should  be  devised  of  supervising  and  controlling  the  service 
and  wares  furnished  by  them,  and  the  prices  charged  by  them  on  poor  orders. 

5.  That  the  law  providing  for  the  care  or  commitment  of  insane  persons 
should  be  rigidly  observed,  and  attempts  of  subordinate  officers  to  commit  per¬ 
sons  without  authority  rigidly  repressed. 

6.  That  better  provision  should  be  made  for  the  care  of  feeble  minded 
adults;  and  that  serious  consideration  be  given  to  the  question  of  segregating 
such  persons,  or  otherwise  guarding  against  propagation  and  increase  of  the 
feeble  minded. 

7.  That  better  statutory  provision  be  made  for  compelling  deserting  or  ine¬ 
briate  heads  of  families  to  contribute  to  the  support  of  their  families. 

8.  That  the  Commissioner  of  Charities  and  Corrections  be  given  the  power 
to  regulate  or  prohibit  the  sale  of  liquor  to  persons  receiving  poor  relief. 

Some  Recommendations  for  Improved  Administration  without  Abolishing 
Overseers  of  the  Poors — 

1.  That  the  per  diem  system  of  payment  to  overseers  should  be  abolished 
and  that  their  compensation  be  regulated  according  to  the  services  performed. 
It  is  suggested  that  overseers  be  paid  by  salary,  graded  in  amount  according 
to  the  population  and  assessed  valuation  of  the  town,  or  else  that  the  actual 
time  employed  by  the  overseer  in  poor  relief  be  reported  in  the  same  manner 
as  employees  of  corporations  report  their  time,  and  the  total  hours  so  report¬ 
ed  be  reduced  to  an  eight  hour  day  basis,  and  the  overseer  paid  accordingly. 
This  should  prevent  charging  a  day’s  pay  for  ten  minutes’  work. 

2.  That  town  fiscal  officers  be  held  financially  responsible  by  their  towns  for 
illegally  paying  to  overseers  mass  appropriations  to  be  expended  by  them. 

3.  That  all  claims  for  poor  relief  be  properly  itemized  and  verified  and  sub¬ 
mitted  for  audit  through  the  same  course  as  other  town  charges. 

4.  That  in  towns  where  there  is  more  than  one  overseer,  each  should  have 
charge  of  a  definite  limited  district,  and  that  each  overseer  should  have  defi¬ 
nite  headquarters  where  he  may  be  found  for  application  for  poor  relief, 
(e.  g.  in  the  town  of  Rye,  one  overseer  lives  in  Port  Chester  and  the  other  in 
Mamaroneck — opposite  ends  of  the  town.  In  Mount  Pleasant,  both  overseers 
live  in  Pleasantville.) 


23 


5.  That  all  the  laws  concerning  the  overseer  of  the  poor  and  outdoor  relief 
should  be  consolidated,  codified,  and  copies  of  such  code  furnished  for  the 
use  of  the  overseers. 

6.  That  overseers  should  be  required  before  entering  upon  the  duties  of 
their  office  to  give  evidence  of  having  familiarized  themselves  with  such 
statutes  and  with  the  proper  mode  of  procedure  in  case  of  applications  for 
relief,  and  should  be  required  to  discharge  their  duties  in  person. 


24 


%wM 


.  m 

i.frM 

;‘fl 


m 


